113 


POLITICAL    PAPERS. 
UC-NRLF 


jg|         SB    2b7    073 

f  THE  WAtt  WITH  SPAIN 
I!.  THE  VENEZUELAN  r     ,/iE, 


THEODORE  MARBURG. 


JOHN    ViURi'HY   ft    GO 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


OK 


* 

Received  ~ 


*7  / 


Accession  No.  *7  /      d~6~~ 


/ 


UNIV. 

Of  rf 


POLITICAL    PAPERS. 


I.    THE  WAR  WITH  SPAIN. 
II.    THE  VENEZUELAN  DISPUTE. 

BY 

THEODORE  MARBURG. 


Reprinted  from  The  Baltimore  American. 


BALTIMORE: 

JOHN   MURPHY  &   CO. 
1898. 


I. 

THE  WAR  WITH  SPAIN. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER.  PAGE  . 

I.    INTERVENTION — THE  LAW  AND  THE  PRAC 
TICE — AMERICA  MUST  ACT  ALONE,        -        5 

II.  OPPRESSION  FLAGRANT  AND  PERSISTENT — 
ULTIMATE  DESTINY  OF  CUBA  —  JUST 
RETRIBUTION  FOR  SPAIN,  -  -  14 

III.  EIGHT  OF  HIGHER  CIVILIZATION,        -  19 

IV.  WISDOM  OF  OUR  COURSE,     -        -        -        -      21 


THE  WAR  WITH  SPAIN.1 

[May  1,  2,  8,  1898.] 


I. 

Intervention — The  Law  and  the  Practice — 
America  Must  Act  Alone. 

nrHE  past  few  months  have  witnessed  a  con 
flict  of  emotions  in  the  breast  of  the  people. 
A  traditional  policy  and  a  wholesome  horror  of 
war  have  been  drawing  them  in  one  direction, 
whilst  indignation  at  inhuman  acts  impelled 
them  in  another.  Those  who  felt  the  justice  of 
America's  position  and  at  the  same  time  valued 
the  President's  noble  attempt  to  enforce  that 
position  without  resort  to  war,  realized  that  to 


1  Copyright,  1898,  by  Theodore  Marburg. 

5 


6  THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

give  utterance  to  their  thoughts  could  only 
serve  to  encourage  the  war  spirit  and  further 
hamper  the  President.7  Now  that  war  has  be 
gun,  it  is  important  to  examine  candidly  the 
principles  involved. 

The  assertion  most  commonly  heard  is  that 
we  have  no  right  to  interfere  in  the  internal 
affairs  of  another  nation. 

A  fundamental  rule  of  international  law  is 
that  the  independence  of  a  state  must  be  re 
spected.  Its  laws  must  be  presumed  to  be  fit 
and  their  execution  just,  and  the  state  must  be 
allowed  to  accomplish  the  fulfillment  of  its  own 
destiny  free  from  outside  interference. 

^  Few  writers  on  international  law  have  failed, 
however,  to  recognize  exceptions  to  this  rule, 
and  some  of  the  greatest  among  them  include 
among  these  exceptions  interference  on  grounds 
of  humanity. ! 

HEFTER  recognizes  it,  and  VATTEL  says, 
"  If  the  prince,  by  attacking  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  country,  gives  his  people  legitimate 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  7 

ground  for  resistance,  if  tyranny  becomes  in 
supportable  and  rouses  the  nation  to  rebellion, 
any  power  has  a  right  to  succor  the  oppressed 
people  if  they  solicit  its  aid." 

Prof.  ARNTZ  is  of  the  opinion  that  interfer 
ence  is  justified  "  when  a  government,  even 
though  acting  quite  within  the  limits  of  its 
sovereignty,  violates  the  laws  of  humanity, 
either  by  measures  hostile  to  the  interests  of 
other  states,  or  by  excessive  injustice  or  cruelty 
which  seriously  attack  our  morals  and  our 
civilization." 

"  The  right  of  intervention  must  be  recog 
nized  because  no  matter  how  much  the  rights 
of  sovereignty  and  of  independence  are  to  be 
respected,  there  is  one  thing  even  more  entitled 
to  respect  and  that  is  the  right  of  humanity 
and  of  human  society,  which  must  not  be 
outraged." 

WOOLSEY  asserts  that  interference  is  justified 
when  crimes  are  committed  by  a  government 
against  its  subjects. 


8  THE   WAR    WITH   SPAIN. 

Acceptance  of  such  a  principle  may,  of  course, 
lead  to  abuses,  but  CALVO  very  properly  re 
marks  that  a  principle  must  be  judged  by  its 
logical  and  common  results,  and  not  by  pos 
sible  abuses  to  which  it  may  lead. 

HALL  states  "  that  interference  for  the  pur 
pose  of  checking  gross  tyranny  or  for  helping 
the  efforts  of  a  people  to  free  itself  is  very 
commonly  regarded  without  disfavor." 

These  opinions  are  cited  not  to  prove  that 
intervention  on  grounds  of  humanity  is  author 
ized  by  international  law;  many  writers,  among 
them  a  majority  of  the  Italian  school,  reject  it. 
The  opinions  are  cited  simply  to  show  that  the 
question  is,  at  least,  an  open  one.  A  just 
estimate  would  probably  be  that  international 
law  has  not  yet  been  developed  to  a  sufficient 
extent  to  cover  all  cases  of  international  action 
and  that,  furthermore,  it  has  its  natural  and 
inherent  limitations  due  to  the  fact  that  it 
lacks  a  punitive  sanction. 

Behind  the  law  within  the  state  are  the  police 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

and  the  whole  military  power  of  the  state. 
Behind  international  law  there  is  nothing  to 
enforce  its  decrees  except  war.  In  intervening 
in  behalf  of  an  oppressed  people  the  state  is 
probably  no  longer  moving  in  the  sphere  of 
international  law,  but  must  justify  its  acts  by 
an  appeal  to  the  common  interests  of  humanity 
or  high  state  policy.  *  // 

There  are  but  few  occasions  which  justify 
the  individual  in  violating  the  wonderful  and 
comprehensive  system  of  law  prevailing  within 
the  state.  There  are  many  occasions  when 
the  people  acting  in  their  national  capacity 
must  step  outside  the  limits  of  the  circum 
scribed  body  of  rules  called  international 
law.-  ' 

If  respect  for  international  law  had  proved 
the  ruling  influence  with  her  government, 
France  would  not  have  aided  America,  and 
the  accomplishment  of  American  liberty  would 
have  been  postponed,  if  not  actually  defeated. 

If  in  1827  the  powers  had  obeyed  the  in- 


OF   THTC 

.    UNIVERSITY  1 


10  THE   WAR   WITH    SPAIN. 

junctions  of  international    law,  Greece  would 
not  have  been  freed. 

If  in  1859  Louis  Napoleon  had  felt  that  the 
observance  of  international  law  was  the  highest 
duty  of  the  state,  he  would  not  have  marched 
into  Italy  to  drive  out  the  Austrian  and  bring 
to  a  successful  issue  the  noble  aspirations  of 
Cavour  and  Victor  Emmanuel  for  Italy's  unity 
and  independence. 

Actual  practice  shows  numerous  instances  of 
interference  in  the  internal  affairs  of  a  nation. 
The  idea  prevailing  in  former  times  that  the 
stranger  was  an  enemy  has  been  rapidly  break 
ing  down  under  the  strides  of  commerce,  travel 
and  frequent  communication,  and  the  tendency 
to  find  kinship  amongst  men  has  as  steadily 
grown.  We  no  longer  look  with  unconcern  on 
acts  of  oppression,  no  matter  what  the  blood, 
nationality  or  religion  of  the  oppressed  people 
may  be. 

Most  intervention  has  been  founded  on  policy, 
but  occasionally  it  bears  the  stamp  of  disinter- 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  11 

ested  action.  This  is  largely  true,  for  example, 
of  the  episode  of  NAVARLNO,  an  event  of  the 
Grecian  struggle  for  independence  already  re 
ferred  to.  The  barbarity  with  which  the  Turk 
conducted  the  war,  pillaging,  murdering  and 
carrying  off  the  Greeks  into  slavery,  aroused 
Europe.  England,  France  and  Russia  sent 
ships  to  patrol  the  Grecian  islands  and  coast  to 
prevent  this,  and  a  collision  with  the  Turkish 
fleet,  in  October,  1827,  resulted  in  the  annihila 
tion  of  the  latter.  Greece  had  then  belonged 
to  Turkey  for  nearly  four  centuries,  the  occu 
pation  of  the  Morea  by  Venice  for  a  time 
excepted,  so  that  this  act  was  armed  inter 
vention  in  the  internal  affairs  of  Turkey.  The 
grounds  on  which  it  was  justified  were : 
humanity,  request  of  one  of  the  parties,  and 
the  propriety  of  putting  a  stop  to  piracy  and 
anarchy. 

It  differs  from  our  intervention  in  Cuba  in 
that  it  was  the  joint  act  of  several  European 
powers,  but  in  this  connection  there  is  this  to 


12  THE   WAR    WITH   SPAIN. 

be  considered.  A  little  over  two  years  ago  we 
flung  at  the  head  of  the  world's  great  colonizer 
and  civilizer  a  missive  which  told  her  that  we 
were  the  arbiters  on  this  continent,  and  that  a 
policy  born  of  the  necessities  of  our  early  days 
was  still  adhered  to.  That  policy  forbids  a 
European  nation  to  interfere  outside  the  sphere 
of  her  own  possessions  here  (are  not  our  own 
obligations  all  the  heavier  on  this  account?) 
and  it  would  likewise  make  it  difficult  for  us 
to  invite  any  European  nation  to  co-operate 
in  the  present  armed  intervention. 

The  desire  to  act  more  in  conformance  with 
the  practice  of  nations  with  respect  to  inter 
vention  might  next  lead  us  to  seek  the  co 
operation  of  some  of  the  American  countries. 

When  European  governments  co-operate,  it 
means  the  co-operation  of  equals.  An  alliance 
of  the  United  States  with  any  other  American 
government  or  group  of  governments  would 
not  be  such.  Without  any  desire  to  disparage 
other  American  countries,  „  it  may  be  safely 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  13 

asserted  that  our  power  is  so  preponderant 
here,  there  are  so  many  ways  in  which  we 
could  secure  allies  and  influence  their  action, 
that  the  moral  force  of  such  an  alliance  would 
be  lacking.  Co-operation  with  other  American 
powers  would  be  more  or  less  empty  form,  a 
simple  reflection  of  European  methods  without 
their  significance.  It  is,  then,  fitting  that  with 
respect  to  foreign  questions  generally  we  should 
act  alone. 

In  the  solution  of  this  particular  question, 
what  American  countries  are  there  whose  co 
operation  we  might  hope  to  secure?  Canada 
is  not  an  independent  American  government, 
whilst  the  balance  of  the  powers  in  the  western 
world,  with  the  exception  of  the  few  settle 
ments  in  the  Guianas,  are  of  Spanish  and  Por 
tuguese  origin,  and  could  hardly  be  counted 
upon  to  co-operate  with  us  in  actual  war 
against  the  mother  country  and  a  closely 
affiliated  country.  Logically,  then,  it  is  the 
United  States  alone  that  can  intervene  in  Cuba. 


14  THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

II. 

Oppression  Flagrant  and  Persistent — Ultimate 

Destiny  of  Cuba — Just  Retribution 

for  Spain. 

It  remains  to  consider  whether  intervention 
at  this  time  is  justified.  The  oppression  which 
warrants  intervention  in  the  internal  affairs 
of  a  state  should  be  flagrant  and  persistent. 
Many  people  in  America  and  elsewhere  believe 
that  the  violation  of  the  laws  of  humanity  and 
justice  has  been  flagrant  and  persistent  in  Cuba. 
There  has  been  not  one  revolution  nor  short 
lived  oppression  which  we  might  patiently 
wait  for  Spain  to  correct,  but  continuous  op 
pression  for  the  greater  part  of  the  present 
century  and  repeated  protests  in  the  form  of 
rebellion  put  down  in  a  bloody  manner. 

The  century  is  drawing  to  a  close,  and  we 
see  the  sense  of  injustice  and  oppression  in  the 
Cuban  as  keen  as  ever  and  an  attempt  on  the 
part  of  Spain  to  reassert  its  authority  the  most 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  15 

bloody  and  disastrous  of  all  in  the  history  of 
the  island.') 

Whilst  England  has  lost  only  one  of  her 
colonies,  and  great  regions  of  the  world  are 
to-day  content  to  remain  under  her  flag,  Spain 
has  lost  all  the  colonies  that  were  strong 
enough  to  resist  her  power.  A  few  islands, 
readily  accessible  and  easily  overrun  with 
troops,  are  all  that  remain  of  her  former  mag 
nificent  colonial  empire.  Her  unjust  govern 
ment,  plunder  of  the  people  by  officials,  and 
over-taxation  for  the  benefit  of  the  home 
country  have  done  this.  This  fact  alone  con 
stitutes  a  serious  arraignment  of  Spain's  atti 
tude  in  the  modern  world. 

'Cuba  is  so  close  to  our  shores  that  the  long- 
story  of  its  wrongs  has  been  forced  upon  our 
attention.  The  cry  of  distress  which  has  gone 
up  from  the  island  so  often  during  the  century 
has  more  than  once  aroused  the  sympathy  of 
our  people.  We  have,  indeed,  been  patient. 
If  the  Spanish  character  were  different,  if  we 


16  THE   WAK   WITH   SPAIN. 

could  be  led  to  believe  that  Spain  would  be 
just  to  Cuba  in  the  future,  we  might,  even  at 
this  late  day,  have  refrained  from  armed  inter 
vention,  but  such  hope  is  belied  by  the  History 
of  the  island  during  the  century. 

The  vital  consideration  is  that  the  most 
liberal  government  which  the  Spaniard  could 
grant  the  Cuban  would  not  bring  with  it  a 
permanent  solution  of  the  Cuban  question.  It 
is  generally  admitted  that  with  her  present 
population  Cuba  is  unfit  for  self-government. 
This  means  that  she  must  be  governed  from 
outside,  and  if  she  remains  under  the  Spanish 
flag,  it  means  that  after  an  attempt  at  autonomy 
the  cruel  and  greedy  hand  of  Spain  will  again 
be  found  at  her  throat  and  in  her  pocket. 
That  which  we  have  just  witnessed  is,  then, 
to  be  repeated.  The  American  people  have 
arrived  at  the  just  conclusion  that  no  per 
manent  solution  of  the  Cuban  question  can  be 
reached  without  turning  out  the  Spaniard,  and 
they  feel  that  it  is  time  to  act.  \  Few  deceive 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  17 

themselves  as  to  the  ultimate  destiny  of  Cuba. 
When  we  turn  the  present  government  out, 
the  logic  of  events  will  bring  us  the  island. 
We  of  course  propose  to  let  the  inhabitants 
decide  for  themselves  and  try  to  work  out  their 
own  destiny,  but  every  thing  points  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  insecurity  of  life  and  prop 
erty  under  self-government  will  in  time  lead 
them  to  apply  for  admission  to  the  Union. 
Once  under  stable  and  just  rule,  immigration 
there  from  Anglo-Saxon  countries  should  ulti 
mately  give  a  sufficient  basis  for  sound  local 
government.  / 

If  the  unhappy  island  can  realize  in  no  other 
way  the  very  reasonable  wish  for  enlightened 
and  humane  government  in  this  advanced  age, 
is  not  our  course  proper?  The  world  knows 
very  well  that  it  was  not  the  desire  to  add 
Cuba  to  our  territory  which  led  to  war,  but 
if  the  Cuban  question  can  be  solved  in  no 
other  way  than  by  action  which  will  ultimately 
bring  the  island  to  us,  we  should  not  hesitate 
2 


18  THE   WAR   WITH  SPAIN. 

to  assume  the  full  responsibility  of  such  action. 
It  is  best  to  face  such  an  issue  squarely  and 
frankly.  If  we  are  right,  it  matters  not 
whether  certain  of  the  Powers  approve  of  our 
course  or  not ;  the  situation  at  home  is  too 
delicate  for  them  to  do  more  than  enter  a 
diplomatic  protest.  It  will  be  difficult  to  col 
lect  an  indemnity  from  a  country  already 
bankrupt,  and  the  war,  which  the  dictates  of 
humanity  have  led  us  to  undertake,  will  cost 
us  a  round  sum,  so  that  we  cannot  be  charged 
with  acquiring  the  island  gratuitously. 

As  for  Spain,  leave  out  of  consideration  all 
previous  rebellions  in  Cuba,  even  all  her  other 
deeds  in  the  present  campaign  of  three  years, 
and  consider  the  sole  fact  of  her  having  penned 
up  several  hundred  thousand  non-combatants, 
preventing  them  from  earning  a  living,  and 
then  failing  to  supply  them  with  the  necessaries 
of  life  until  one-half  of  the  whole  number 
perished.  Is  not  the  loss  of  Cuba  a  just  retri 
bution  for  such  an  act  ? 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  19 

III. 

Right  of  Higher  Civilization. 

Another  important  consideration  is  that  of 
the  higher  civilization  supplanting  the  lower. 

When  the  white  man  came  to  America  there 
were  about  500,000  Indians  in  what  now  con 
stitutes  the  United  States.  To-day  there  still 
remain  225,000.  We  have  then  brushed  aside 
275,000  Indians,  and  in  place  of  them  have 
this  population  of  70,000,000  of  what  we  re 
gard  as  the  highest  type  of  modern  man.  The 
fact  that  the  Indian,  who  was  tolerably  prolific, 
did  not  number  more  than  500,000  after  all 
the  centuries  he  must  have  lived  here,  indicates 
a  formidable  struggle  against  nature,  a  struggle 
against  cold,  famine,  disease  and  loss  of  life 
through  internecine  war :  in  other  words,  a 
great  sum  of  human  misery  which  we  have 
been  quite  justified  in  brushing  aside  and  sup 
planting  with  the  peace  and  comparative  con 
tentment  and  high  pursuits  which  prevail  over 
the  continent. 


20  THE   WAR  WITH   SPAIN. 

'  The  question  presented  by  Cuba  differs  only 
in  degree.  The  Spaniard  and  his  American 
descendant  are  very  much  the  same  people  they 
were  several  centuries  ago.  What  are  the  Span 
ish  countries  of  South  America,  what  is  Spain 
itself  doing  in  all  the  walks  of  life  which  make 
for  progress  ?  In  previous  centuries  Spain  has 
done  a  splendid  and  useful  work  in  the  western 
world,  but  she  has  failed  to  keep  abreast  of  the 
world  in  moral  and  intellectual  progress,  and 
must  pay  the  penalty.  The  principle  that  the 
higher  civilization  is  justified  in  supplanting 
the  lower  is  a  dangerous  one  to  admit,  because 
of  every  nation  regarding  its  own  type  as  the 
highest,  but  there  are  certain  broad  facts  which 
must  force  the  impartial  observer  to  admit  the 
superiority  of  our  own  race,  the  Anglo-Saxon, 
in  the  qualities  that  contribute  to  human 
advance.  At  any  rate,  we  hold  to  the  opinion 
that  we  have  done  more  than  any  other  race  to 
conquer  the  world  for  civilization  in  the  past 
few  centuries,  and  we  will  probably  go  on  hold 
ing  to  this  opinion  and  go  on  with  our  conquests. 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  21 

If  we  believe  that  there  is  a  distinct  pur 
pose  in  all  that  is  about  us  and  in  our  own 
presence  here,  we  cannot  escape  the  conclusion 
that  man's  express  duty  is  the  uplifting  of 
man.  The  duty  to  improve  and  elevate  him 
self  and  his  fellows  thus  becomes  an  end  in 
itself  and  a  justification  of  life.  Every  rational 
human  being,  no  matter  how  humble  his  station 
in  life,  has  the  power  to  help  or  hinder  this 
process.  He  is  influenced  principally  by  his 
environment,  made  up  of  the  national  character 
and  tendencies,  and  a  nation  in  its  collective 
capacity  directs  the  process.  Any  nation  which 
blocks  the  way  of  human  progress  must  expect 
to  be  brushed  aside  by  more  powerful  and 
vigorous  blood. 

IV. 

Wisdom  of  Our  Course. 

Is  the  step  we  have  taken  wise? 
The  first   concern   of  a   government  is  the 
welfare  of  its  own  people,  and  if  these  people 


OF  THE 


22  THE    WAR   WITH   SPAIN, 

are'  an  enlightened,  a  moral,  and  a  progressive 
people,  the  world's  work  is  best  furthered  by 
their  healthy  growth.  If  intervention  in  Cuba 
will  seriously  interfere  with  such  growth  here, 
it  must  be  condemned. 

When  the  Louisiana  territory,  extending  to 
the  headwaters  of  the  Mississippi  and  west  to 
the  Rocky  Mountains,  was  acquired  in  1803, 
few  could  foresee  the  portentous  consequences 
of  the  act.  It  is  now  apparent  that  without  it 
we  would  not  have  seized  what  then  became  a 
contiguous  territory,  California,  nor  made  a 
successful  claim  to  Oregon,  and  unless  all  this 
had  been  acquired  we  would  have  been  con 
fronted  with  the  possibility  of  a  rival  power 
on  the  Continent,  involving  a  standing  army, 
extensive  lines  of  fortification,  and  an  occa 
sional  war. 

The  electric  telegraph  and  steam  navigation, 
the  handmaids  of  foreign  trade,  are  of  such 
recent  origin  (within  the  memory  of  living 
men),  that  trade  between  the  nations  must  be 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  23 

in  its  infancy.  If  this  is  so,  the  future  will 
witness  a  great  development  of  wealth  along 
the  seacoast,  important  cities,  expensive  harbors, 
and  approaches,  and  with  them  a  growth  in 
naval  power.  The  possession  of  the  West 
Indies  may  then  acquire  an  importance  re 
sembling  that  of  the  Louisiana  Territory. 

Presuming  that  our  institutions  are  lasting, 
the  position  of  power  which  the  future  will 
bring,  must  some  day  draw  the  West  Indies  to 
us.  We  must  expect  a  renewal  of  the  forward 
movement  which  led  to  our  overrunning  and 
acquiring  Texas.  The  planting  of  its  outposts 
in  a  constantly  widening  circle  on  the  part  of 
a  vigorous  and  healthy  race,  is  one  of  the  most 
familiar  processes  of  history.  Such  a  matter 
need  give  the  living  generation  but  little  con 
cern  as  time  is  an  element  in  working  out  such 
questions.  When  the  movement  of  races  or  the 
history  of  nations  is  under  consideration,  a 
century  or  so  is  a  short  period ;  but  to  acquire 
the  largest  and  richest  of  the  Indies  now  may 


24  THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

make  our  inevitable  task  lighter  in  the  future. 
When  we  have  owned  Cuba  for  half  a  century 
it  will  be  a  simpler  matter  to  persuade  some 
European  government,  particularly  if  it  is  seek 
ing  our  moral  or  active  support  at  the  moment, 
to  release  or  sell  to  us  some  other  of  the  islands. 

Our  first  President  laid  down  for  us  a  policy 
of  non-interference  and  freedom  from  alliances 
in  Europe.  Soon  afterward  came  the  enunci 
ation  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  which  meant 
that  we  regarded  the  growth  of  European 
influence  on  this  continent  as  a  menace  to  our 
liberties.  In  our  weakness  we  could  not  afford 
to  meddle  in  the  disputes  of  Europe  and  could 
not  afford  to  have  a  European  government 
constitute  itself  a  too  powerful  neighbor  on 
our  own  continent.  This  policy  was  next  ex 
tended  to  include  non-intervention  by  us  in  the 
affairs  of  American  countries  as  well. 

We  have  here  a  creditable  perception  of  the 
needs  of  the  young  state.  But  that  state  ex 
pands  in  territory,  in  numbers,  in  knowledge, 


THE   WAR  WITH   SPAIN.  25 

and  in  wealth,  and  that  which  was  fitting  in  its 
youth  and  unripeness,  hampers  and  dwarfs  and 
stifles  it  in  its  manhood.  Itself  subject  to  the 
belittling  influence  of  a  discussion  revolving  in 
a  narrow  circle  around  the  tariff  and  finance, 
it  beholds  kindred  races  playing  such  part 
in  the  world's  affairs  that  questions  from  all 
quarters  of  the  globe  are  daily  knocking  at 
their  doors  for  solution ;  it  recognizes  the  in 
spiring  influence  of  such  larger  part ;  the  spirit 
and  moral  motive  and  power  are  there,  and 
the  nation  presently  moves  to  its  proper  place 
among  its  fellows. 

Only  overcrowded  countries  can  colonize 
successfully.  Others  send  their  merchants 
abroad,  but  these  are  not  true  colonizers 
because  only  numbers  and  the  men  who  labor 
with  their  hands  can  colonize.  The  self-seek 
ing  of  the  colonist  has  spread  civilization,  and 
nothing  but  self-seeking  will  carry  on  this 
work.  America,  which  is  not  in  a  position  to 
colonize  at  a  distance,  cannot  at  present  take 


26  THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

part  in  the  work,  but  it  can  throw  its  influence 
in  favor  of  the  best  races  engaged  in  it.  It 
can  play  another  role,  too,  an  important  and 
noble  one,  and  play  it  the  more  successfully 
because  it  is  not  under  any  pressure  to  acquire 
territory  at  a  distance,  and  its  action  will, 
therefore,  be  recognized  as  disinterested.  It 
is  the  role  of  the  arbiter  who  proclaims  that 
justice  shall  be  done,  and  who  is  powerful 
enough  to  see  that  justice  is  done.  May  it  not 
happen  that  we  can  throw  our  weight  on  the 
side  of  justice  abroad  without  interfering  with 
home  progress?  Might  not  such  a  course 
even  serve  to  distinctly  further  home  progress? 
A  great  fillip  would  be  given  the  national 
spirit  through  awakening  the  higher  instincts 
of  the  people  and  fostering  a  sense  of  unity 
of  purpose  and  proper  national  pride.  No 
one  denies  that  these  were  tremendous  quick 
ening  factors  in  Germany  after  the  Franco- 
Prussian  war,  starting  her  on  her  career  of 
prosperity  and  power. 


THE   WAR  WITH   SPAIN.  27 

Such  things  afford  a  striking  example  of 
how  that  which  is  regarded  as  unreal  and 
intangible  may  become  of  the  highest  practical 
value.  Local  questions  which  are  so  slow  of 
solution  now  might  find  a  solution  in  the  new 
attitude  of  the  public  mind.  If  it  succeeded  in 
bringing  a  different  class  of  men  into  politics 
the  splendid  machinery  of  our  government 
would  be  made  to  show  what  it  can  do.  There 
is  evidence  in  many  directions  that,  whilst  we 
have  made  such  marked  progress  in  intelligence 
and  wealth,  the  moral  sense  of  the  people  has 
grown,  too.  If  our  politics  are  debased,  it  is 
not  because  the  mass  of  the  people  are  debased. 
In  the  course  of  the  world's  history  it  has 
generally  been  the  minority  that  has  ruled. 
When  history  was  great,  it  was  a  minority  of 
great  men  who  made  it.  When  an  age  appears 
degenerate,  it  is  often  because  a  minority  of 
inferior  men  rule  it,  the  majority  remaining 
apathetic.  A  minority  of  the  unscrupulous  and 
active  may  govern  a  majority  of  honest  and 


28  THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN. 

indifferent.  Under  American  institutions  elec 
tive  bodies  should  really  represent  the  best  that 
is  in  the  community.  They  ought,  at  least,  to 
represent  something  above  the  average.  What 
often  actually  takes  place  is  that  they  do  not 
even  represent  the  average,  but  represent  a 
minority  of  the  worst.  The  reference  above  is 
to  the  solution  of  questions  such  as  this. 

In  the  next  place,  the  gain  in  diplomatic 
prestige,  which  would  follow  such  participation 
in  the  world's  affairs,  would  help  the  country's 
commerce.  Growth  of  political  power  is  usu 
ally  followed  by  a  sharp  rise  in  commercial 
importance. 

In  other  words,  whilst  a  moral  and  a  pro 
gressive  nation  serves  the  world  best  by 
regarding  its  own  interests  first,  and  thus 
strengthening  and  developing  itself,  the  field 
of  an  enlightened  self-interest  is  wide  enough 
to  include  discreet  action  abroad  in  the  interest 
of  humanity. 

We  have  abundance  of  land  and  a  condition 


THE   WAR   WITH   SPAIN.  29 

of  politics  within  the  country  which  pronounces 
against  any  further  extension  of  territory  until 
certain  pressing  questions  are  solved.  The 
mass  of  the  people  will  recognize  this  as  the 
proper  policy  to  be  pursued  under  ordinary 
circumstances,  but  it  will  not  prevent  them 
from  dealing  like  men  with  an  exceptional 
condition. 

In  brief:  Spanish  rule  in  Cuba  has  caused 
much  human  misery  to  which  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  United  States  to  put  a  stop ;  this  can  only 
be  done  by  her  ultimately  acquiring  the  island 
since  no  other  solution  of  the  question  would 
be  permanent -the  loss  of  the  island  to  Spain 
is  but  a  just  retribution  for  inhuman  acts;  its 
ultimate  acquisition  by  the  United  States  may 
be  an  act  of  high  state  policy. 


II. 

THE    VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 


THE  VENEZUELAN  DISPUTE. 

[Reprinted  from  Baltimore  American  of  Dec.  22,  1895.] 


War  and  the  Military  System. 

\ I  7 HEN  the  cause  of  justice  calls  for  war, 
commercial  interests  should  never  be 
allowed  to  block  the  way.  Aside  from  the 
question  of  national  honor,  there  are  many 
compensations  in  war.  The  armaments  of 
Europe  are  often  spoken  of  as  a  deadly  weight 
upon  the  energies  of  the  respective  European 
countries.  It  is  pointed  out  that  the  men  are 
taken  from  their  callings  for  service  in  the 
army  in  the  best  years  of  their  life,  the  infer 
ence  being  that  they  lose  a  knowledge  of  their 
trade  or  profession,  and  lose  the  taste  for  work. 
3  33 


34  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

In  the  face  of  this  we  see  Germany,  which 
has  brought  its  military  system  to  the  highest 
scientific  perfection,  rapidly  becoming  one  of  the 
great  commercial  and  manufacturing  nations 
of  the  world.  Italy,  also,  has  undoubtedly 
benefited  by  her  military  system.  One  ex 
planation  of  this  apparent  contradiction  is  that 
men  are  brought  together  from  different  sections 
of  the  country,  acquire  new  tastes  and  ideas, 
and  are  impressed  with  the  benefits  of  organi 
zation  and  the  necessity  for  order  and  obedience. 
The  country  lad,  who  ordinarily  would  have 
no  ideas  above  his  plow  and  the  routine  of 
farm  work,  becomes  a  broader  man,  and  at  the 
end  of  his  military  service  is  a  more  useful 
citizen. 

Adequate  strife  of  one  kind  and  another,  in 
the  present  order  of  nature  and  throughout 
nature,  means  progress.  A  few  years  ago 
Bluntschli,  who  presided  at  the  Congress  of 
International  Law  in  Oxford,  sent  to  Von 
Moltke  a  copy  of  the  regulations  which  had 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  35 

been  drawn  up  by  the  congress  for  the  conduct 
of  armies  in  time  of  war,  their  express  object 
being  to  lessen  the  hardships  of  war.  In  his 
reply,  Von  Moltke  said  that  he  could  express 
but  little  sympathy  with  the  movement. 

He  believed  in  war,  not  only  as  a  necessity  at 
times,  but  in  war  for  its  own  sake.  He  main 
tained  that  without  it  the  nations  would  de 
generate  into  money-loving  and  selfish  people ; 
that  war  brought  out  the  nobler  traits  in  men, 
and  that  to  be  ready  to  lay  down  one's  life  for 
his  country  was  an  ultimate  test  of  manhood. 

Again,  we^are  forced  to  recognize  the  benefits 
of  a  successful  war.  Of  these  the  most  im 
portant  relate  to  the  political  life  of  the  nation, 
internal  as  well  as  external.  But  when  the 
spirit  of  a  healthy  people  is  aroused  by  a 
stirring  national  event  the  results  are  not 
solely  political.  Such  an  event  permeates  the 
whole  world  of  mind  and  produces  definite 
results  in  industry  as  well.  What  explains  the 
surprising  repair  of  waste  often  witnessed  is 


36  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

that  the  greatest  factors  in  production  are  the 
character  and  trained  habits  of  the  people. 
These  remain,  even  much  of  the  machinery  of 
production  remains,  after  the  most  devastating 
war.  The  people  and  machinery  can  produce 
much  more  than  they  are  ordinarily  called 
upon  to  produce.  When,  therefore,  the  eco 
nomic  void  which  the  waste  of  war  has  created 
sets  all  the  people  and  all  the  machinery  at 
work  there  follows  a  period  of  unusual  pros 
perity,  the  effects  of  which  are  cumulative  and 
lead  to  real  development. 

German  unity  with  all  its  results  for  Ger 
many,  and  for  the  world,  could  probably  not 
have  been  attained  in  any  other  way  than  by  a 
great  war.  It  is  likewise  difficult  to  see  how, 
without  the  frightful  drama  of  the  Civil  War, 
America  could  have  liberated  the  slave  and 
demonstrated  to  the  world  that  the  Union  was 
a  thing  of  permanence  and  meant  to  fulfill  the 
great  destinies  mapped  out  for  it  by  the  framers 
of  its  wonderful  constitution.  It  has  never 


THE  VENEZUELAN    DISPUTE.  37 

known    such    a   period  of   prosperity  as   that 
which  followed  the  Civil  War. 

This  is  one  side  of  the  picture ;  the  other 
has  been  too  vividly  painted  by  the  brush  of 
experience,  and  is  too  deeply  burned  in  the 
hearts  and  brains  of  Americans  to  need  de 
scription.  By  common  consent,  the  dictates  of 
humanity,  and  a  sense  of  the  awful  suffering 
that  accompanies  war,  clearly  enjoin  the  avoid 
ance  of  an  unjust  war.  The  true  strength  and 
manhood  of  an  individual  and  of  a  nation  are 
shown  by  their  asserting  their  power  only 
when  a  just  occasion  calls  it  forth.  Is  there 
such  an  occasion  now  in  the  controversy  with 
England? 

The  Monroe  Doctrine. 

Our  own  authorities  tell  us  that,  from  a 
standpoint  of  international  law, we  have  nothing 
to  stand  upon.  What  we  are  about  to  do  is  to 
endeavor  to  insert  into  the  international  code 
a  principle  for  which  we  have  at  times  con- 


38  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

tended,  but  which  has  never  yet  been  recog 
nized.  Is  the  principle  justly  interpreted  by 
Secretary  Olney  ?  And  were  this  so,  is  the 
present  occasion  a  fitting  one  upon  which  to 
introduce  it?  And  is  the  nation,  to  whom  we 
are  allied  so  strongly  by  ties  of  blood  and 
tradition,  the  proper  one  upon  which  to  make 
war  in  order  to  establish  the  principle? 

In  the  minds  of  those  who  enunciated  it, 
the  Monroe  doctrine  clearly  meant  that  no 
European  government  should  be  allowed  to' 
overturn  the  liberal  governments  of  the  west 
ern  world  in  order  to  substitute  for  them  a 
monarchical  government,  nor  to  seize  upon 
territory  there  for  purposes  of  colonization. 
Secretary  Olney  has  so  enlarged  the  scope  of 
the  doctrine  that  it  embraces  any  territorial 
dispute  between  an  Americm  power  and  a 
European  power.  This  is  admittedly  true, 
because  he  specifically  disclaims  any  knowledge 
of  the  merits  of  this  particular  controversy. 
His  language  is  :  "  It  is  not  admitted,  how- 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  39 

ever,  and,  therefore,  cannot  be  assumed,  that 
Great  Britain  is  in  fact  usurping  dominion 
over  Venezuelan  territory." 

England's  Attitude  Toward  Arbitration. 

Great  Britain  admits  that  the  real  owner 
ship  of  a  portion  of  the  territory  is  open  to 
question ;  with  respect  to  this  portion  she  is 
ready  to  submit  to  arbitration.  In  addition 
to  this,  however,  Venezuela  claims  territory 
which  Great  Britain  asserts  to  be  hers  abso 
lutely,  and  which  has  been  settled  by  her 
people.  Because  of  her  aggressive  policy,which 
has  really  resulted  in  settling  large  regions  of 
the  globe  with  a  religious  and  a  moral  people, 
and  a  people  with  traditions  of  political  liberty, 
she  has  but  few  friends  amongst  the  nations, 
and  experience  has  taught  her  that  she  cannot 
rely  upon  arbitration  for  fair  decision  of  dis 
putes  to  which  she  is  a  party.  She  is  in  the 
position  of  a  man,  who,  in  a  hostile  land,  has 
had  brought  against  him  a  claim  for  the  pos- 


40  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

session  of  property  which  he  feels  to  be  rightly 
his  and  his  children's,  and  is  asked  to  submit 
the  claim  to  the  judgment  of  a  biased  tribunal. 
However  much  the  members  of  an  international 
tribunal  may  be  bent  upon  absolute  fairness, 
it  cannot  be  denied  that  national  prejudice  will 
unconsciously  play  an  important  part  in  their 
decision. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  Monroe  doctrine  is 
not  a  part  of  ^international  law,  and  it  would 
appear  from  the  above,  moreover,  that  it  is 
questionable  whether  the  doctrine  is  applicable 
to  the  present  dispute.  It  remains  to  be  con 
sidered  whether  England  is  the  country  of  all 
others  with  whom  we  should  enter  upon  a  war, 
the  justice  of  which  is  questionable,  for  the 
establishment  of  a  new  principle  as  a  part  of 
international  law. 

The  English-speaking  People. 

The  spread  of  the  English-speaking  people, 
of  whom  we  form  an  important  part,  is  one  of 


THE  VENEZUELAN    DISPUTE.  41 

the  significant  facts  of  the  century.  It  has 
been  pointed  out  that  in  1700  there  were 
7,000,000  English-speaking  people;  at  the 
beginning  of  the  present  century  there  were 
20,000,000,  and  to-day  we  constitute  a  body 
of  115,000,000.  What  does  this  signify? 
Nothing  less  than  the  spread  of  liberal  in 
stitutions,  political  freedom,  humanity  and 
enlightenment  over  a  great  portion  of  the 
world. 

If  we  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  it  is  not 
to  our  interest  to  colonize,  why  should  we 
block  this  movement,  so  important  to  civili 
zation,  by  checking  English  colonization  ?  Re 
flection  will  show  us  that  we  have  many  more 
ties  with  England,  France,  Germany  or  Italy 
than  we  have  with  the  South  American  re 
publics.  They  are  building  up  everything 
that  makes  the  modern  world,  science,  art, 
philosophy,  the  principles  of  a  broad  humanity 
and  the  science  of  government. 


42  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

The  South  American  Republics. 

What  are  the  South  American  republics 
doing  in  all  these  walks?  They  are  republics 
in  name,  but  are  they  democracies  in  fact? 
The  form  of  government  has  much  to  do  with 
the  happiness  of  a  people,  but  the  adoption  of 
a  good  form  cannot  alone  give  the  people  a 
good  government.  Unless  a  government  is  so 
fortunate  as  to  possess  men  enlightened  and 
conscientious  to  a  degree  above  their  fellows 
(which  is  not  often  the  case),  it  is  apt  to  be 
good  or  bad,  according  as  public  opinion  and 
the  attention  given  to  its  expression  insist  or 
not  upon  its  fulfilling  its  duties.  The  sense  of 
civic  duty,  like  everything  else  in  the  moral 
and  intellectual  world,  depends  upon  environ 
ment.  It  is  not  uncommon  to  see  a  law  passed 
which  is  quite  in  advance  of  public  sentiment 
and  which  eventually  educates  public  sentiment 
up  to  its  high  level ;  but  generally  it  is  unwise 
to  count  upon  this.  Laws  will  depend  for  their 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  43 

efficacy  upon  public  support.  If  they  do  not 
reach  the  public  conscience,  they  will  do  more 
harm  than  good.  The  harm  is  in  their  non- 
enforcement,  which  throws  discredit  upon  law 
in  general. 

The  South  American  republics  are  examples 
of  admirable  laws  and  institutions  applied  to 
people  wholly  unequal  to  the  task  of  grasping 
their  meaning.  They  may  have  other  ad 
mirable  qualities,  but  traditions  of  political 
liberty  and  a  capacity  for  their  exercise  do  not 
go  with  the  Latin  blood.  It  will  require  long 
years  of  practice  to  acquire  them.  We  know 
how  unstable  their  governments  are,  to  what 
frequent  revolutions  they  are  subject,  and  how 
sadly  they  are  found  wanting  when  measured 
by  the  standard  of  international  morality.  To 
protect  them  against  discipline  at  the  hands  of 
European  powers  means  that  we  must  ourselves 
be  responsible  for  their  actions,  our  readiness 
to  do  which  Secretary  Olney  specifically  and 
rightly  disclaims. 


v^^\BRAi 

f  OF  THE 

1 IVERSITY 


44  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

England's  Province. 

England  is  charged  with  being  grasping.  In 
its  foreign  policy  a  nation  should,  above  all, 
be  a  trustee — a  guardian  first  of  its  people's 
honor,  and  then  of  their  material  interests. 
Considerations  of  general  human  sympathy  and 
theoretic  justice  may  play  their  part,  but  always 
subservient  to  the  trusteeship.  If  a  nation 
represents  what  is  best  in  the  world — and  every 
nation  must,  of  necessity,  believe  itself  to  repre 
sent  the  best  either  in  its  present  state  or  future 
possibilities — it  serves  the  interests  of  the  world 
at  large  in  extending  its  own  possessions  and 
influences  by  colonization.  As  commerce,  in 
seeking  its  own  ends,  has  brought  about  a  re 
vival  of  Roman  law  in  Europe,  and  has  sup 
planted  savagery  with  civilization  in  many 
regions  of  the  world,  just  so  the  self-seeking 
of  a  great  nation  unconsciously  accomplishes 
a  great  good.  England  may  have  been  unjust 
to  us  in  our  earlier  days — even  then  it  was 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  45 

largely  party  and  not  the  whole  people — 
but  for  many  years  she  has  had  no  other  in 
tention  than  to  treat  us  as  nearest  of  kin  and 
regard  us  as  her  friend.  Whilst  our  school 
books,  in  treating  of  the  Revolution,  instil  ani 
mosity  toward  England  in  the  breast  of  the 
majority  of  American  children — and,  unfor 
tunately,  the  mass  of  the  people  remain  chil 
dren  in  this  respect — English  children  are 
taught  to  respect  the  spirit  of  the  American 
Revolution,  to  honor  the  names  of  their  own 
great  statesmen  who  advocated  our  cause  at  the 
time,  and  to  believe  that  our  cause  was  just. 
They  regard  the  events  which  brought  about 
the  American  Revolution  as  a  stupid  mistake 
on  the  part  of  the  king  and  a  clique  who  hap 
pened  to  be  in  power.  The  people,  as  a  whole, 
have  no  other  than  the  most  friendly  regard 
for  us. 

When  the  Monroe  doctrine  was  framed,  we 
were  so  weak  that  the  growth  of  a  foreign 
power  on  the  American  continent  constituted  a 


46  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

menace  to  us.  Truly,  no  sensible  man  regards 
it  as  such  to-day.  Dispassioned  observers  must 
admit  that  we  are  rapidly  becoming  the  great 
government  of  the  world,  and  will  soon  be 
forced  to  take  our  place  at  international  coun 
cils,  in  spite  of  our  home-keeping  policy.  We 
are  destined  to  be  the  peer  of  all  in  everything 
that  constitutes  an  enlightened  people  and  an  en 
lightened  government.  Jealousy  should  there 
fore  be  beneath  us.  Instead  of  courting  war 
with  England,  we  should  accept  the  invitation 
extended  by  the  members  of  the  English  House 
of  Commons  to  form  a  permanent  treaty  of 
arbitration,  and  stand  with  her  before  the 
world  for  all  that  we  both  represent  in  politics, 
religion  and  morals.  Such  a  union  would  be 
the  most  powerful  the  world  has  ever  seen,  and 
make  for  enlightened  progress  everywhere. 

Our  True  Interests. 

Moreover,  if  we  are  farseeing,  we  will  not 
block  the  extension  of  English  colonization  in 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  47 

America.  In  this  connection  what  French 
colonization  did  for  England  is^  significant. 
In  India  the  French  conquered  an  important 
region  which  eventually  fell  into  the  lap  of 
England.  France  paved  the  way  for  England 
in  Egypt.  She  was  in  .the  Mississippi  Valley 
before  England,  and  colonized  Canada  for  her. 
Few  doubt  that  our  northern  neighbor,  by 
mere  force  of  gravity,  will  in  time  become 
part  of  us,  and  the  same  would  be  the  tendency 
with  respect  to  English  settlements  elsewhere 
in  America. 

We  might  accomplish  the  same  end  by  the 
establishment  of  a  protectorate  over  the  weak 
and  more  unstable  South  American  countries, 
so  that  Anglo-Saxons  would  settle  there.  It 
is,  however,  to  be  questioned  whether  we  have 
as  yet  sufficiently  digested  the  heterogeneous 
immigration  which  has  been  coming  to  us,  and 
whether  our  sinews  are  sufficiently  formed  to 
undertake  such  a  disturbing  task.  Watch  a 
stone  which  is  thrown  from  a  tall  cliff,  and 


48  THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 

you  will  see  it  drawn  into  the  cliff  before  it 
reaches  the  ground  below.  The  same  law  of 
gravitation  will  inevitably  cause  the  nation  to 
the  north  of  us,  allied  by  blood  and  tradition, 
to  some  day  knock  at  the  doors  of  the  great 
republic  for  admission.  If  the  natural  process 
is  too  slow,  we  might  take  Canada  by  force. 
The  objection  to  embodying  Mexico,  and  Cuba 
likewise,  on  the  ground  that  they  are  peopled 
by  a  race  with  traditions  different  from  our 
own  is  not  a  valid  one,  because  if  they  become 
part  of  us  the  emigration  from  the  United 
States  and  from  Anglo-Saxon  countries  would 
soon  give  us  a  preponderance  of  Anglo-Saxon 
blood  in  them.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
decide  that  our  policy  for  the  present  should 
not  be  that  of  expansion  and  colonization,  why 
should  we  obstruct  English  expansion  either 
in  America  or  elsewhere?  This  involves  dis 
carding  a  portion  of  the  Monroe  doctrine, 
which,  as  has  been  pointed  out,  is  really  out 
of  date,  but  leaves  to  us  the  nobler  and  more 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE.  49 

disinterested  part  of  the  doctrine,  that  which 
constitutes  us  the  guardian  and  propagator 
of  liberty  in  America. 

To  Sum  Up: 

First.  The  Monroe  doctrine  is  not  at  present 
a  part  of  the  international  law. 

Second.  The  doctrine  is  not  affected  by  the 
present  controversy. 

Third.  To  force  ourselves  into  the  contro 
versy  and  to  endeavor  to  establish  the  doctrine 
as  a  part  of  international  law  by  a  war  with 
England  is  more  than  foolish,  and  would  be  a 
wrong  to  mankind. 

Fourth.  A  part  of  the  Monroe  doctrine  has 
lost  its  usefulness  and  should  be  discarded. 

England  and  America  stand  for  political 
progress  in  the  modern  world.  All  the  govern 
ments  in  Continental  Europe,  except  Russia 
and  Turkey,  are  modelled  either  on  the  lines  of 
the  English  government  or  American  govern- 
4 


50 


THE  VENEZUELAN   DISPUTE. 


ment.  We  have  together  developed  political 
liberty,  and  to  enter  into  war  with  one  another 
would  most  surely  be  a  blow  to  civilization. 


OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 


04570 


RF'.                       _  __  ftfe«*  i  »*JLV>I.I  o  wivxvu  w  uu 

LOAN  DEPT. 

THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  BEFORE  CLOSING  TIME 
ON  LAST  DATE  STAMPED  BELOW 

RECEIVED 

DEC    O'66-IPII 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RECE/i/tr 

•>«  VgQ 

flfT   3  A  ,«-     ., 

'  66  -J  p|| 

I     r\  A    m. 

L°AN  DePTs 

ri^npral  T.ihrarv 

